We know about gravity by measuring how objects move in a gravity field.

We know about photons by measuring the effect they have on photo-sensitive chemicals or photo-electric plates.

We know how hot water is by measuring how much the heat expands a column of mercury, a metal bar, how it changes resistance of an electrical conductor, etc.

We know about wind-speed by measuring how quickly it rotates a wind-speed detector or anemometer.

Try this for yourself. Can you think of anything science can detect which doesn’t depend on detecting its effect on something else?

In other words, to be detectable by science, something must exert an effect, and to exert an effect on anything means that that effect can be measured. Therefore, anything which cannot be detected cannot possibly be influencing or changing anything in any way, otherwise we could measure it.

An undetectable god is an impotent god and is indistinguishable from a non-existent one. Such a god would be utterly incapable of communicating anything or of creating anything. A universe in which such a god, or gods, exists would be indistinguishable from one with no gods whatsoever.

So, theists, when you use the ‘undetectable by science’ excuse for your god, you are actually telling us your god is utterly impotent. (Tweet this)

Clearly, what is being explicated in this entire post is a principle that (likely) originated with Plato, something philosophers call the "Eleatic Principle."

That is: "an entity is to be counted as real if and only if it is capable of participating in causal processes."

There are many defenses and criticisms of it, even from philosophers hostile or indifferent to theism. I suggest that you Google the phrase and contend with the literature on the matter so as to be able to defend the content of this post in light of more sophisticated criticisms and formulations of it.

If Jesus is Lord and he answers prayer, you might expect a blip in the statistics for, say, remission from cancer in the West - the Christian world. The Buddhists, Hindus and Jews should lag behind along with the Muslims. But remarkably, the undetectable loving god makes no impression on the stats.

How do you handle presuppositionalism's rebuttal that casual inductive processes only work because their god makes it so. Typically they ask for an account or accounting of casualty and induction with an intention of disparaging any intellectual effort of a non-theist in an attempt to prompt an admission of ignorance. They seek to hide their god in darkness of human ignorance. Nice blog too, btw. Best Wishes and Regards to All.

All commission earned from Amazon for the sale of books, etc. advertised here, will be donated to Oxfam.

Hopefully, religious and other offensive advertising content has now been blocked from this site. Please let me know if you see any.

Note: This is my only blog. Others purporting to be by me or bearing my ident will contain plagiarised and deliberately altered material from this site or material presented as being by me. They will usually be run and maintained by a well-know unemployable Internet abuser, fraud and expelled Catholic seminarian who appears to have developed an obsessive fascination with me, bordering on the psychotic. You can read about him and what caused his psychosis here.